Just last week we wrote about the finalization of e-bike rules by the US Secretary of the Interior that apply to Bureau of Land Management (BLM), National Park Service (NPS), and Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) land. Now, the US Forest Service (USFS) is seeking public comment on their own proposed e-bike directive, which IMBA labels “troublesome.”
Like the Department of Interior (DOI) rules, the USFS proposal gives local land managers control over e-bike access. However, unlike the DOI, the USFS rules would require a public process to include Travel Management and an environmental analysis before opening a trail to e-bikes, rather than starting from a default “open” position.
IMBA notes the new Forest Service rules would continue to consider all classes of e-bikes to be motorized vehicles, separate from traditional mountain bikes. As a result, allowing eMTB access to a trail could require the trail to be opened to all motorized traffic. Therefore, IMBA is recommending the USFS adopt a similar stance to the DOI by providing a motorized exception for eMTBs.
Beyond potential user conflicts that might arise from opening more trails to motorized traffic, IMBA points out that changing the designation of a trail can put certain types of trail funding — like Land Water Conservation Funds — at risk.
For a full summary of IMBA’s position, read this Action Alert on their website. The official comment period is open until Monday, October 26, 2020 and comments can be submitted electronically here.
16 Comments
Oct 26, 2020
1. The original mountain bike population ( like me- that s right kids, grandpa used to rip it up back in the day at Moab, long before it was Moab Mbike Mecca and Fruits both) and we are getting up there in age. Many of us still ride but find it more and more difficult to tackle the uphills. Going downhill, there is absolutely zero difference between electrical assist and pure pedal. But going uphill, thevelectrix assist sure helps us have a nice day with the kids. We can actually keep up. There are a lot of us by the way, and many of us now qualify under ADA. So go ahead and lock us out you selfish purests, and watch the litigation start under ADA, thus stalling any travel plan for years. Meantime the trails will remain open and we will win in the long run. No different than the current litigation going on over 4 wheeler access and disabled folks. I've watched this one drag on for fifteen years.
2. MTBikes are mechanized, w bikes are mechanized, dirt bikes are mechanized. They all prefer single track. Thet are all equally expelled from hiking and horseback trails. 4 wheeler's and side by sides are excluded from single track. Dirt bikes are excluded from MTBikes single track. But dirt bikes can ride double track,and MTBikes cam ride motorized single track. What you end up with is a whole lot less available to you overall, because all the mechanized groups are seperate voices and thus cannot compete with the bipedal and horseback crowd ( who are united btw). If you make e-bike riders seperate from Mbike riders here is what happens, you divide your current strength by whatever percent is aging and still loves to get out. You become weaker in this war ( and trust me its a war....there are those who woukd prefer none of us have any access except city bike paths). If you don't get this, look at history. New riding areas don't magically appear. What there is gets divided up and then it gets challenged by the park and walk crowd. You may not even be aware that at least half if what you currently ride is in the midst of litigation and may disappear. If you purests don't learn some get along skills and start uniting the user groups, soon you may end up with nothing. United we stand, divided we fall....we all fall. Catch a clue people.
Nov 1, 2020
Oct 31, 2020
Oct 29, 2020
Oct 27, 2020
Now those are some salient and well-stated points.
Oct 29, 2020
Oct 30, 2020
Oct 25, 2020
What IS surprising is the amount of ebikers commenting. Just the ebikers alone I think had more comments than hikers and equestrians combines and there is no national organization, I don't even think there is local ebike groups. These are just people that aren't organized advocating for their ebike use. Imagine five years from now when they become less powered and cheaper. Specialized, Orbea and Trek all are have or are releasing their less powered lighter versions. I think it will be the way manufactures move forward in the future.
Oct 29, 2020
Maybe if you ride the hiker with pacemaker. You cant ride him on public trails.
Oct 25, 2020
Oct 25, 2020
Oct 26, 2020
Oct 30, 2020
Oct 24, 2020
"a low-speed electric bicycle (as defined in section 38(b) of the
Consumer Product Safety Act) shall not be considered a motor vehicle as
defined by section 30102(6) of title 49, United States Code."
https://www.congress.gov/107/plaws/publ319/PLAW-107publ319.htm?fbclid=IwAR0P7xUO-ZHo2Q8FyI7dlVJ6W79WRP7cfm18Heh4bGhuP8CmFquYtgjcens
Oct 24, 2020
Should they be exempted and be allowed in non-motorized trails is a separate question, but to say that they’re not motor vehicle is funny.
They are not motorcycle, but should not be in same category as non-motorized mtb either.
Oct 24, 2020
A big part of the debate comes down to whether e-bikes are more similar to motorcycles, or to bicycles. If you believe,
as IMBA seems to believe,that e-bikes are closer to bicycles, then placing them in the motorized category, while technically accurate, would make it harder to designate trail use to include both without negative consequences to mountain bikers. There are groups separate from IMBA that are working to open more trails to e-bikes, and when they are successful, mountain bikers face potential problems under the proposed FS rule update.Strikethrough: I actually don't know how IMBA would answer the question so I should not have speculated.